A theological alternative to Grube’s notion of ‘justified religious difference’

Abstract

Grube proposes a framework for respectful dealing with different religions: ‘justified religious difference. The author comments on the epistemic setting of Grube’s thesis. It testifies a cognitive approach to religious faith by handling religious faith and epistemic belief as analogous argument. His criticism of the pluralist approach is not very convincing. This framework is too abstract for an interreligious dialogue. The author proposes a concept of religious faith within a web of practices, liturgical rituals. A concrete interreligious dialogue can enrich the Christian faith in its practical styling.

Keywords:

• religious diversity
• interreligious dialogue
• pluralist hypothesis
• non-traditional epistemology
• faith as personal knowledge

Acknowledgement

I thank the anonymous referees for their constructive remarks.

Notes

1. See van den Brom, “God, Gödel and Trinity,” 56–76, esp. 59.

2. Hick, An Interpretation of Religion, 235–238.

3. van den Brom, “God, Gödel and Trinity,” 70–73.

4. Wilken, The Spirit of Early Christian Thought, 7; my italics.

5. Polanyi and Prosch, Meaning, 156.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Luco J. van den Brom

Prof. Dr. Luco J. van den Brom (1946) is Extraordinary Professor of Systematic Theology at the University of Pretoria, Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology at the Dutch Protestant Theological University Groningen, Professor Emeritus of Philosophical Theology at University of Groningen. He publishes on philosophical and doctrinal theology, on science and religion and fundamental theology.